You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Why ban guns?
- Thread starter the_pragmaticist
- Start date
the_pragmaticist
New member
HarrySchell summarized it nicely...With all that data, all the facts, all the statistics ranging from the simplest (17% of this, more than half of that) to the more mathematical (p-values & trending) refute the hypothesis of a positive relationship between guns and crime. This is actually why this is an interesting discussion...The facts and efficacy of the policy cannot have anything to do with the actual policy because the two are contradictory.
Maybe I should go get that foil out, it's looking bad.
Maybe I should go get that foil out, it's looking bad.
copenhagen
New member
I also have trouble with the concept that the government is trying to disarm us to better control us. It just smacks of tinfoil hats and kool-aid.
I wish I believed you- for my own peace of mind. Unfortunately, the only valid reason I can logically come up with for gun control is just that: CONTROL.
HarrySchell
New member
As to improving control over us, gun control has proven essential in dictatorshipls. We in this country generally look at places like Zimbabwe and think it can't happen here.
Thre is no such thing as "can't". I agree it is unlikely, but that is a function of a well-armed populace and our heritage, which is under intellectual assault every day. When you lose your heritage, as they have in the UK, you start losing identity, and without identity you become whatever the more powerful forces in the society want you to be.
Being disarmed automatically makes you dependent on those more powerful to define your "rights"...whatever you have you enjoy at their sufferance, not because you are in your own deserving. That is not freedom, it is waiting for those with power to come and take what they want. They may not come for a long time, but they will, because humans are fallen creatures, capable of good and evil.
If a powerful guy becomes evil, you have trouble and there is little you can do.
Thre is no such thing as "can't". I agree it is unlikely, but that is a function of a well-armed populace and our heritage, which is under intellectual assault every day. When you lose your heritage, as they have in the UK, you start losing identity, and without identity you become whatever the more powerful forces in the society want you to be.
Being disarmed automatically makes you dependent on those more powerful to define your "rights"...whatever you have you enjoy at their sufferance, not because you are in your own deserving. That is not freedom, it is waiting for those with power to come and take what they want. They may not come for a long time, but they will, because humans are fallen creatures, capable of good and evil.
If a powerful guy becomes evil, you have trouble and there is little you can do.
I believe there are multiple reason here. I have trouble believing that there is a concerted effort to disarm Americans in order to prevent us from rebelling against a tyrannical government. I think there may be a few politicos who think that is a good plan, but I do not think they have enough power to drive such an initiative to other politicians.
Rather, it comes down to one of three things - 1) the politician has an irrational fear of firearms or somehow truly believes that a country without firearms will be a safer place, 2) the politician does not want to admit that impoverished urban minorities are to blame for violence, rather guns are 'the real problem', 3) guns are an easy target (like tobacco companies were) and lets the politician look like they are being pro-active without actually doing anything worthwhile (and then when they have eliminated those firearms from their state they go after neighboring 'irresponsible' states who are supplying the bad guys).
These politicians can even truly believe that they are doing the right thing, so it's hard to paint them as some 'evil gun-grabber.'
Most importantly, I am all for any rational programs that provide benefit to those who are living in urban areas with no real prospects. The social reforms of the 60's fell flat and failed to deliver anything to these folks, and those neighborhoods are a perfect breeding ground for a drugs and gangs. We have such a need for Vo-tech jobs, yet everyone always hypes the idea that college is the only true path to happiness. I have many friends with college degrees who would have been better served becoming plumbers or mechanics. More job security and better pay. You cant outsource a plumber.
Rather, it comes down to one of three things - 1) the politician has an irrational fear of firearms or somehow truly believes that a country without firearms will be a safer place, 2) the politician does not want to admit that impoverished urban minorities are to blame for violence, rather guns are 'the real problem', 3) guns are an easy target (like tobacco companies were) and lets the politician look like they are being pro-active without actually doing anything worthwhile (and then when they have eliminated those firearms from their state they go after neighboring 'irresponsible' states who are supplying the bad guys).
These politicians can even truly believe that they are doing the right thing, so it's hard to paint them as some 'evil gun-grabber.'
Most importantly, I am all for any rational programs that provide benefit to those who are living in urban areas with no real prospects. The social reforms of the 60's fell flat and failed to deliver anything to these folks, and those neighborhoods are a perfect breeding ground for a drugs and gangs. We have such a need for Vo-tech jobs, yet everyone always hypes the idea that college is the only true path to happiness. I have many friends with college degrees who would have been better served becoming plumbers or mechanics. More job security and better pay. You cant outsource a plumber.